The individuals reached are, if press accounts are correct, inexperienced. As such when they see OBL's side, "winning," it drastically reduces their resistance to demands and propaganda. At best unsure of themselves, they move to believe that the teachings of OBL and demand for jihad against America must be obeyed because that is the winning side.
If we leave in the manner you want, the world will see that as a sign of weakness. As surrender.
That is a posion we can not afford.
At the ages of 1 to 6?
Try to follow the post.
I tell you what's funny to me - you may find that I may be the person wqho MOSTS agrees with you that the most important national security issue we face today is the fight against Islamic extremism, manifested in the form of Al Qaida and similar groups.
Where you and I disagree is that I believe we should argue the issue with FACTS, not made up crap like McCain used tonight.
IF you could see your way to arguing honestly on these issues you will be shocked how much you and I will be on the same side of issues and E, squeak, sailor and all of our good liberal friends at this blog (I am a Centrist, American Exceptionalist myself) wil start aiming their intellectual firepower at my views.
And then you know what can break out? An honest to good stimulating high level discussion among Americans and and friends from other countries about the problems of our world and how we think they can be solved.
Sean Penn said a great thing the other day - dissent is democracy. And it is.
We need a few important things to make this a great blog. And we have most of them already. Smart folks commenting. People of good faith discussing issues. Respect for opposing points of view.
Let's add the final ingredient - respect for facts. With all due respect to my conservative friends here - respect for facts is lacking on their side.
This is understandable in some ways. As Rob Corddry once famously said - the facts have had a liberal bias the past 6 years.
I can imagine decent arguments for why we can not leave Iraq. I made some myself in 2004. But the first step in reaching those arguments is to respect the facts.
The IRaq War has been a Debacle. You know it has been. Bush is an incompetent. You know he is.
But that should not be the end of the debate. But these acknowledgements are important beginnings. [ Parent ]
Ask me what I think about specific issues and see where you think I fall.
I'll give you what some will see as not liberal views.
I am a free trader.
I believe in capitalism.
I am for a strong military.
I believe that the United States is a great country.
I envy people who have faith.
I believe that the government should only be involved where it can serve the Common Good better than the private sector.
I am for pragmatic solutions to the country's problems, I do not adhere to ideological solutions.
I believe the Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever created, despite its flaws at creation.
I believe Abraham Lincoln was the greatest American who ever lived, despite being a politician.
I think George H.W. Bush was a good President.
I think Bill Clinton was also a good President.
I think Russ Feingold is a Centrist.
I love the ACLU.
How's that for starters? [ Parent ]
1.Can you really forgive H.W. for Clarence Thomas?
Free Trade means nothing, Fair Trade means something. Free Trade, by the standards of unfettered capitalism means nothing more than those with money win, those without lose. Period. Leaving humanity's fate to a rigged board game seems, um, slightly crazy.
A strong military in what manner? Defensive? Offensive? Expansionist? How about addressing the really difficult issue of the military culture. From religious extremism to a pathological lack of imagination to bases strewn all over the globe, take it on. Are you for closing our military empire abroad and focusing on really defending the country?
Believing we're a great country is like saying "Air is fun to breathe". Empty platitude. We are sometimes great, sometimes awful, but our citizens are still more distant from their government and its actions abroad than almost any people on the planet, free or otherwise. Hell, a free and great country does NOT censor war news like we do now. I love America, but we are terribly f*cked up in ways that are insidious to deal with. Capitalism's enshrining of private interest above public is at the core.
You envy people of faith, my ass. I don't buy it. You are astounded by their ability to turn off their rational minds at will, maybe, but envy? Gimme a break.
There is little to no difference between government and the private sector. We are a government of, by and for the people. Our government corruptions are identical to those of the private sector. Since the private sector CONTROLS the government, they merely reflect each other. Look at the rank failure of private companies to run public schools, for example. The private sector simply enjoys a historical respect here as it doesn't in other parts of the world, because our entire nation was FOUNDED by businessmen who wanted more money in their pockets -- we weren't about getting rid of kings and all that sh*t, since we had no problem sucking the French kings d*ck to win the war. Hence the trouble the revolution had in recruiting simple workers to fight. And the disdain many revolutionary leaders had for these ordinary folk. Hell, Washington was the richest man in America when he became president? How much has changed since then? Uh...
Who the hell isn't for pragmatic solutions? And saying you are is just as much an idea (ideological) as anything else.
The Constitution has great parts, awful parts, parts in between. What has made it great is the nation is was written for has never, NEVER, had to deal with foreign invaders because of its fortunate geography. We have been allowed to f*ck up and wildly so, on our own, more than any nation in the world's history. The constitution was secondary to our geographic solitude and sheer size. You can't control what you can't control, and this place was always too big to control. Our freedoms derive from that as much as anything else.
Wow, Lincoln a great president, really going out on a limb there. Sheesh.
Bush I was good? By what standard? His crack cocaine madness? His hatred of those on welfare? His foreign policy incompetence that led to the first Gulf War -- I mean, hell, Saddam ASKED us for permission. Come on now.
Clinton was the single most disappointing president of my lifetime. As ignorant a man about his own psyche as I've ever heard or seen. From Gays in the military to bullsh*t NAFTA to the sexual dysfunction he decided to treat by consulting the clergy, he was a failure as a genuine liberal in almost every way. Even his welfare reform was callous for a man who came from his roots. He was a corporate shill at heart and couldn't break free of it. Though he had an intellect and certain sensitivity that played well at home and abroad. At least he had that Rhodes' Scholar thing.
Who's a centrist? What's a centrist? Huh???
I love the ACLU, too. Wahooo!!
As for Islamic Extremism, it's only as big a problem as we decide to make it. The idea, Tent, that we can't even win the rhetorical battle with it right now, well, that should tell you loudly and clearly how we haven't even used HALF a brain in countering its influence. But we are a Christian nation, with leaders who cannot talk about existence as free people should, but instead talk about it in terms of the chains of faith and creation, like children, like the extremists we're supposedly fighting. Imagine if our political leaders could actually speak and act like the truly great people America produces. Try to imagine a Martin Luther King in today's environment. The fact that we can't is sad. And damning. And the larger fact is, you can't go after radical Islam without going after radical Christianity that plays such a huge role in American politics. Childishness is killing us from inside, not from out. And that childishness is what keeps us from really making a dent in this problem of religion.
Greed, as ever, is the biggest problem. America has given the world the idea that nothing is ever enough. We have taken the idea of pleasure and plenty and transferred it from Kings to commoners. We waste hand over fist like no one else on the planet. We drive oversized cars, live in oversized houses, eat oversized meals. We are full of sh*t, in other words, pissing into the wind and then saying, "Wow, why are my eyes burning so much?"
We are stagnant as a nation right now, as stagnant as I can imagine us being, considering the tools and resources at our disposal. [ Parent ]
And my point here is that we need one last little thing from the Right, respect for the facts.
I may take you up later on each of these. But not this mintue. Stay tuned. [ Parent ]
But were they terrorists when they followed us home Jim?
Your question is a nice ploy, and really is so rhetorical that you probably didn't ask it expecting an answer. Let me surprise you.
If you read my comment you would know the answer is, no. But that isn't what's important. It is what they become, and not all, just some. And not just here, but globally. The real question is how many and their dedication. Will they be fellow travelers that just support by accepting the claims of the activists involved in politics designed to force Sharia law on the west (See France, see Neatherlands, see Denmark, see Minneapolis, see cartoon riots, see Koran riots....)through protests and politcal pressure, or will they become full fledged terrorists ready to attack and die?
So in a global sense, it is about perceived power. Except for Israel the ME has no history of democracy, but a long history of dictators, usually maintained by terror against the citizens.
I speak of the ME, but it is actually a human condition. People are attracked to power and support leaders who they think can help them, and who can hurt them. If we look weak, the terrorists will look stronger.
If we follow your plan, the true DEBACLE will follow as the various terrorist organizations sort out their issues, and then loosely cooperate in continuing their attacks against the west. The time frame is not specific, but it is real.
You see this as a single issue. I see it on a larger scale. You see it as next month. I see it as ten years from now. You see it as a means to return power to the Democrats. I see it as a conflict that should be outside politics.
You speak of liberals. I don't see liberals. I see Democratic politicans seeking to use a group as their base. I see people who are borderline anarchists, pacifists, libertarian left and, strangely, or at least to me, anti-Israel in their anti-war attacks. In their anger they shout down the opposition when they can, and as Edger said:
Do we offer them respect? Absolutely not. We do our best to marginalize and get rid of them.
Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.
I find it humorous that these two commentators who supposedly treasure debate, dissent and protest are the authors of such statements.
You say that dissent is democracy. That is true. But I say that after debate and after dissent we have elections and should move forward based on what we have collectively decided. That is the essence of a Republic. For it to work, rights must be coupled with responsibility. The individual must agree to accept the group decision or else we have anarchy. And while anarchists shout power to the people, their destruction of the existing structures usually lead to dictatorships.
You speak of facts, and blame the Right. I see little respect for "facts" from either side. (See Squeaky's comment.) The one thing I treasure about the Internet is that it is full of "facts." Some of them are actually true.
Finally, you close with:
But that should not be the end of the debate. But these acknowledgements are important beginnings.
You opened with a rhetorical questioned designed to place me into the position of answering a question that is essentially meaningless. You close with a statement that seeks to establish the framework of the debate.
As I did at your beginning, I reject your closing. The debate must support not only why, or why not we should leave Iraq, but what will be the resuts of our doing so on a global basis.
Have a nice day. [ Parent ]
Do you deny that you have done so?? [ Parent ]
I feel sorry for you, but there is nothing I can do to treat it here.
And indulging your games only exacerbates your problems. [ Parent ]
You look great running away from the facts. [ Parent ]
Seen Rosie lately?? [ Parent ]
But as soon as you do it will shrink to the size of a gnat and you can flick it away with your little finger. [ Parent ]
Your answer is all that was needed - "If you read my comment you would know the answer is, no."
Which is my point. And my larger point is we need to demand truth in these discussions.
You can make a cogent argument for why we must stay in Iraq. The one McCain makes is not one of them.
YOU should demand better. [ Parent ]
My life is not centered around politics. If I can believe your moniker, yours is.
As for facts, as I said, both sides claim many, some are actually true..
When you write a post about Rudy's command center and leave out his reasoning on the "front page" that is not being "factual." Now that doesn't make you immoral or evil. It does show that you are a partisan.
But let's admit it and have a debate based on that.
So I invite you to go back and read my total comment. Your desire to ask rhetorical questions and then claim the answer is all you need is not exactly the actions of someone who wants a honest debate, but someone who wants to debate the mechanics of their interest, which is politics.
[ Parent ]
Re: Murder or Treatment? (none / 0) (#57) by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 21, 2006 at 11:42:52 AM EST Squeaky you got it. Killing looters, good. Killing medical patients, bad.
Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.
Sorry Jondee... [ Parent ]
I doubt that anyone incompetent has a chance of becoming president, unless they are so unbelieveably stupid that they really can be just a hand puppet.
It think it would show publicly more than it does, and I doubt he'd be able to carry off his deceptive 'just a dumb good ole boy' act if he was that stupid.
Bush is a clown definitely, but I think stupid clown is a simplification.
Owning the World - The Great Illusion:
In the sixties and seventies, a group of right-wingers in the United States formed a society of vindictive and power hungry men who thought they could reinvent reality. Initially they received little notice and operated inside the American Enterprise Institute; that think tank became the womb for these megalomaniacs and their monstrous ambition of remaking the world. Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz were among them and the movement was to turn into a preposterous beast... The clown didn't have to do anything other than smirk and occasionally lift his hand in a fist; they knew that would be enough to impress the world and, in particular, the American people. Oh yes, and he would pretend to be one of the people, just like your cousin Dave or your next-door neighbor.
The clown didn't have to do anything other than smirk and occasionally lift his hand in a fist; they knew that would be enough to impress the world and, in particular, the American people. Oh yes, and he would pretend to be one of the people, just like your cousin Dave or your next-door neighbor.
Joshua Muravchik, American Enterprise Institute:
We got lucky with Reagan. He took the path we wanted, and the policies succeeded brilliantly. He left office highly popular. Bush is a different story. He, too, took the path we wanted, but the policies are achieving uncertain success. His popularity has plummeted. It would be pigheaded not to reflect and rethink. But we ought to do this without backbiting or abandoning Bush. All policies are perfect on paper, none in execution. All politicians are, well, politicians. Bush has embraced so much of what we believe that it would be silly to begrudge his deviations.
But we ought to do this without backbiting or abandoning Bush. All policies are perfect on paper, none in execution. All politicians are, well, politicians. Bush has embraced so much of what we believe that it would be silly to begrudge his deviations.
Absolutely convinced we possess the right to pursue our "happiness" and "security", regardless of the cost to the Earth and the rest of its sentient inhabitants, we US Americans are in a race to hoard the most toys, to eat the most food, to have the most orgasms, to be the best looking, and to be the biggest winners as we engage in a repugnant orgy of narcissistic and gluttonous hedonism. We wage war perpetually, strip the world bare like a swarm of locusts, and give virtually nothing in return. Ensuring our "happiness" and "security" extracts a tremendous price from the rest of the Earth. Since it rose to military and economic hegemony at the close of World War II, the United States, its proxies, an array of US-installed ruthless reactionary tyrants, and the World Bank have worked in concert to slaughter, torture, and impoverish untold millions of human beings in the "developing world" in an endless quest to satiate our plutocracy's insatiable thirst for power and treasure. Bush, his henchmen, and their multitude of war crimes are not anomalies.
We wage war perpetually, strip the world bare like a swarm of locusts, and give virtually nothing in return. Ensuring our "happiness" and "security" extracts a tremendous price from the rest of the Earth.
Since it rose to military and economic hegemony at the close of World War II, the United States, its proxies, an array of US-installed ruthless reactionary tyrants, and the World Bank have worked in concert to slaughter, torture, and impoverish untold millions of human beings in the "developing world" in an endless quest to satiate our plutocracy's insatiable thirst for power and treasure.
Bush, his henchmen, and their multitude of war crimes are not anomalies.
We satisfy our endless needs and Justify our bloody deeds, In the name of destiny and the name Of god
And you can see them there, On sunday morning They stand up and sing about What its like up there
They call it paradise I dont know why You call someplace paradise, Kiss it goodbye
--The Last Resort [ Parent ]
Extremist taunts his victims from prison Victims of Eric Rudolph, the anti-abortion extremist who pulled off a series of bombings across the South, say he is taunting them from deep within the nation's most secure federal prison, and authorities say there is little they can do to stop him. [...] But Rudolph's long essays have been posted on the Internet by a supporter who maintains an Army of God Web site. In one piece, Rudolph seeks to justify violence against abortion clinics by arguing that Jesus would condone "militant action in defense of the innocent."
Victims of Eric Rudolph, the anti-abortion extremist who pulled off a series of bombings across the South, say he is taunting them from deep within the nation's most secure federal prison, and authorities say there is little they can do to stop him. [...] But Rudolph's long essays have been posted on the Internet by a supporter who maintains an Army of God Web site.
In one piece, Rudolph seeks to justify violence against abortion clinics by arguing that Jesus would condone "militant action in defense of the innocent."
(p.s. Just like all those east asians that defeated our country when the domino effect happened because we left VN.) [/snark] [ Parent ]
All Rudolph is to you is a straw man to try and say the radical Moslems are no problem. [ Parent ]
All Rudolph is to you is a straw man to try and say the radical Moslems are no problem.
I didn't say that. I merely said that I think you use him as a strawman because anyway you look at it, his attacks are related to the abortion issue. That is self limiting.
The radical Moslems attacks are not self limiting, and the total group size is probably a million times the size of the one Rudolph is involved with.
It is then, a difference in degree.
I like neither. But I tend to worry less about being hit by lighting as I do the associated tornado. [ Parent ]
The Al Qaeda Clubhouse: Members lacking
[Before 9/11, Osama bin Laden's group was small and fractious. How Washington helped to build it into a global threat.] ..."up to 9/11, Al Qaeda could barely hold its act together, that it was a failing group, hounded from every country it tried to roost in (except for the equally lunatic Taliban-run Afghanistan) . . . This is the reality of the group that the Bush Administration has said would engage us in a `long war' not unlike the Cold War--the group that has led to the transformation of U.S. foreign policy and America's image in the world." ... Al Qaeda had 72 members when it was founded in 1989. Twelve years later, the task force got its hands on an updated membership list after a CIA Predator destroyed a building near Kabul during the American invasion of Afghanistan. The membership list was discovered in the rubble, along with dozens of casualties, including Mohammed Atef, one of bin Laden's closest aides. It showed that bin Laden had a grand total of precisely 198 sworn loyalists.
..."up to 9/11, Al Qaeda could barely hold its act together, that it was a failing group, hounded from every country it tried to roost in (except for the equally lunatic Taliban-run Afghanistan) . . . This is the reality of the group that the Bush Administration has said would engage us in a `long war' not unlike the Cold War--the group that has led to the transformation of U.S. foreign policy and America's image in the world." ... Al Qaeda had 72 members when it was founded in 1989. Twelve years later, the task force got its hands on an updated membership list after a CIA Predator destroyed a building near Kabul during the American invasion of Afghanistan. The membership list was discovered in the rubble, along with dozens of casualties, including Mohammed Atef, one of bin Laden's closest aides. It showed that bin Laden had a grand total of precisely 198 sworn loyalists.
The Department of Defence defines Al Qaeda as "a radical Sunni Muslim umbrella organization established to recruit young Muslims into the Afghani Mujahideen and is aimed to establish Islamist states throughout the world, overthrow 'un-Islamic regimes', expel US soldiers and Western influence from the Gulf, and capture Jerusalem as a Muslim city." They're probably right. I think that's a good assessment. But, it's pretty much on a par with defining the objectives of groups like Fred Phelps and his band of christian(?) nutbars, or Aryan Nation, or Ann Coulters or Pat Robertsons followers, and bears no relation to these groups status or non-status as representative of the thinking and intentions of all people in their respective societies - Al Qaeda in Islamic countries, and the groups I mentioned in western Christian societies. There are crazy fringe fanatics in every society. Al Qaeda is probably a little bigger that the three I just mentioned, but is probably not anywhere the size of the group that supports bush's hegemonic fanaticism. There are no hordes of billions of insane Islamic killers out there about to wash over us in a tidal wave of massacre.
They're probably right. I think that's a good assessment. But, it's pretty much on a par with defining the objectives of groups like Fred Phelps and his band of christian(?) nutbars, or Aryan Nation, or Ann Coulters or Pat Robertsons followers, and bears no relation to these groups status or non-status as representative of the thinking and intentions of all people in their respective societies - Al Qaeda in Islamic countries, and the groups I mentioned in western Christian societies.
There are crazy fringe fanatics in every society. Al Qaeda is probably a little bigger that the three I just mentioned, but is probably not anywhere the size of the group that supports bush's hegemonic fanaticism. There are no hordes of billions of insane Islamic killers out there about to wash over us in a tidal wave of massacre.
My point was, has been and will be that the issue isn't the number of radical Moslems, but that the Islamic religion and culture of the various countries seem to create radical Moslems.
The Ft Dix 6 had ample opportunity to see America in a positive light but chose to revert to radicalism at the first opportunity. The same for the home grown, some second generation, in England, etc...
This is a movement that spreads by being sure that those it exports through immigration, does not lose contact with its religion, and many religious leaders demands adherance to Sharia law.
This is creating a problem we have never seen before. [ Parent ]
But Bush ordered the military to held open the escape route for bin Laden, while he and Karl and the WH sold a paranoid delusion to the gullible. [ Parent ]
Keep proving it.
BTW - Which movie sound stage did they shoot the landing on the moon??
And do you know we actually had a car design that uses water for fuel??? But Big Oil killed the designer and destroyed it.. [ Parent ]
[al Qaeda] was a failing group, hounded from every country it tried to roost in (except for the equally lunatic Taliban-run Afghanistan)
This is what the bush administration propaganda machine sold to the gullible to justify the invasion of Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or with al Qaeda Paranoid delusion:
The infallible test for identifying a peasant is whether he believed that Saddam was behind the 9/11 attack. It is an unarguable fact, widely known for years, that Saddam was not behind it, yet large numbers of Americans to this day think that he was. In linking Saddam with 9/11, President Bush simply lied, for reasons that seemed good to him, but his lies are not my concern. I am concerned that he never produced evidence and it was widely publicised at the time that there was no such evidence, yet much of the country believed him. ... But why would anyone accept it? Only by suspension of all critical faculties, curiosity about American society, the wider world and indeed, one's information provider. I would also add indifference to the truth, which is crucial in matters of warfare and the lives of men. The American peasant cannot protect his country as he believes he is doing because by his indifference, ignorance and credulity he cannot differentiate truth from falsehood.
I again refer you OBL's comments I quoted in my response to Molly Bloom.
And I again note that you display your distrust in democracy by calling those you disagree with, "peasants." [ Parent ]
As I used tell those worked reported to me.
We need solutions for where we are at now.
How we got here doesn't matter.
We can worry about that after we're through here. [ Parent ]
They want us out of their country. Its the same position we would take if they occupied our country.
The position we cannot afford is the one where the world sees our weakness as gross stupidity. Remaining in Iraq is gross stupidity.
If you don't want the US to be seen as weak, then I suggest you forget Iraq which has an Al Qaida affiliate that is maybe 7% of the problem according to the experts and go after the real thing- OBL and the remenants of Al Qaida.
Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?
"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right" [ Parent ]
As I noted, I give you France, Denmark, Netherlands, the cartoon riots, the Koran riots, taxi cabs in Minneapolis, pork and checkout clerks in Minneapolis, footwashing basins in Minneapolis, El Al ticket counter attacks, 9/11, WTC I, etc., etc.
Plus, I give you OBL's own words from this March '97 interview...
REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States and against the US ? OBL....So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.
OBL....So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.
Now you may want to quibble over the meaning of the "aggressive intervention," but I ask you. What were we doing from 3/97 onward that triggered the various attacks.. USS Cole... the attempt on LAX...9/11...
In fact he means simply that we must not try and stop any Muslim from doing what they want, especially in the context of Sharia law vs secular law. And Sharia definitely controls cultural aspects of life.
On that basis your attempt to cherry pick where the enemy is at is utter nonsense.
Isn't your real position that you want ALL military action to stop and turn our strategy into the failed Clinton strategy of a criminal justice defensive one?? [ Parent ]
But Bush ordered the military to hold open the escape route for bin Laden, while he and Karl and the WH sold a paranoid delusion to the gullible. [ Parent ]
2nd: "They" think we are imposing our culture on them. Or didn't you notice?
3rd: I don't lose any sleep over Muslims demanding we kowtow to thier culture in this country. It isn't going to happen.
This is not a call to cultural war:
OBL....So (sic), the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.
Look at it carefully Jim... what is OBL saying? desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world
I don't oppose military action per se. I was for military retaliation* in Afghanistan. I don't oppose police efforts either. They are not mutually exclusive. You are the proverbial carpenter who only has a hammer and therefore see everything as a nail.
(Note: I feared Bush would muck up military retaliation and I was correct about that)
We are engaged in a cultural struggle.
Make a new account